- (1) Workers inside the Pentagon were
killed by inside-the-building explosives several minutes before the
flying object crashed through the west wall of the building.
- Barbara Honegger has proven the false-flag,
inside-job, provocateur, and false-victimhood establishing nature of the
attack on the Pentagon. Her findings are as conclusive -- if not more so
-- than my own -- yet she is one of the investigators that "Big Truth"
investigators avoid interviewing or featuring in documentaries, books or
organized public forums.
- The best people in any field -- detective work, government,
social science, history -- are always the ones that the big-mouths and
the Big Truth organizers are directing you away from. May I point out that
the real leader of the 9-11 truth movement is not Fetzer -- who blackballs
Honegger and Eastman -- but David Ray Griffin -- who features Honegger's
findings in his latest book: The New Pearl Harbor Revisited.
- Here on youtube is Barbara Honegger outlining her evidence:
- Now read in detail what she uncovered:
- Seven Hours in September: The Clock that Broke the Lie
- by Barbara Honegger, M.S.
- Re: .. my research and analysis re the inside-the-Pentagon
- The bottom line of my work is that the real story of
9/11 is inside explosives at both the WTC and the Pentagon, with planes
merely the pre-planned cover stories to match the pre-scripted Official
Lie. It not only serves as the core of David Ray Griffin's 'Reports of
Bombs' in Ch. 2 of his latest book The New Pearl Harbor Revisited, but
is also the Appendix in Jim Marrs' 9/11 expose book The Terror Conspiracy.
- The missing Elephant in the Room is the 'other half'
of Ranke and Marquis' conclusion in this piece "that the plane seen
by so many people did not hit the Pentagon, but flew over the building
AT THE SAME TIME THAT PRE-PLANTED EXPLOSIVES CAUSED A HUGE FIREBALL AND
THICK, BLACK SMOKE, obscuring the fact that the plane was still in the
air and flying away... To conclude that the fireball was caused by explosives
pre-planted in one of the most heavily guarded buildings on the planet,
in an intentional false flag attack to justify war, would require observers
to have a degree of perspicacity that was extremely rare in the pre 9/11
world, AND ONLY SLIGHTLY LESS RARE NOW.
- My "Pentagon Attack Papers" has long marshalled
the evidence for the inside-the-bldg. explosives, which, by the way, went
off just after 9:30 -- way before the 9:47:46 official alleged 'impact'
time.-- ... which can be read as the link under my entry at www.PatriotsQuestion911.com
as well as many other web sites, including S.P.I.N.E. Its evidence and
findings also form the core of the section 'Reports of Bombs' in Ch. 2
on the Pentagon attack in David Ray Griffin's most recent 9/11 expose book
Th e New Pearl Harbor Revisited.
- Barbara Honegger
- (831) 233-1032
- If I may digress from this discussion of Honegger's findings.
Here is my only interview on 9-11 that is still avaiable on the internet.
(Years ago I was interviewed, along with Christopher Bollyn in, I think,
January of 2002 by Tom Valentine -- but that interview took place before
the Pentagon security camera pictures were first released March 7, 2002,
and besides Valentine took down the interview and my interview on Bernard
Baruch down after only a few months -- Tom has maintained a much lower
profile ever since. I ahven't heard from him at least five years.) I am
grateful to Mr. Giuliani for keeping this interview in his archive.
- Dick Eastman discusses other aspects of 9-11 May 17,
- The interview begins 9 minutes and 15 seconds into this
- Charles Giuliani Guest: Dick Eastman
- Dick Eastman
- Charles talking with Dick Eastman about 9-11 research
- 1 http://arc.republicbroadcasting.org/Hertz/07/05/Hertz_051707_110000.MP3
- 2 http://arc.republicbroadcasting.org/Hertz/07/05/Hertz_051707_120000.MP3
- Winamp: http://arc.republicbroadcasting.org/Hertz/07/05/Hertz_0517.m3u
- WindowsMedia: http://arc.republicbroadcasting.org/Hertz/07/05/Hertz_0517.asx
- RealMedia: http://arc.republicbroadcasting.org/Hertz/07/05/Hertz_0517.ram
- Quicktime: http://arc.republicbroadcasting.org/Hertz/07/05/Hertz_0517.qtl
- (2) Looking at the pieces
- The piece of an American Airlines Boeing 757 has been
definitely identified as coming from the starboard side (starboard is the
side to your right if you are seated in the plane facing forward.) But
the piece was photographed on the lawn north of the crash. This section
of the lawn was portside (on the left) of whatever flying object hit the
building. Did the wind carry it to the wrong side of the plane? That would
be impossible. Check the smoke. The wind was blowing from the northwest.
This object is not aerodynamic enough to have flown this distance, through
the explosion and against the wind. This piece of placed at this location
to be photographed. The photographer, Mark Faram, writes, see his
letter to me below -- that he did not arrive on the scene until ten minutes
after the crash-bombing event. This piece was on the cover of Newsweek
magazine and was shown in newspapers and magazines around the world. This
piece of debris is what "convinced" the world that Flight 77
crashed into the Pentagon. Now, however, we know this evidence was planted.
Rather than proving that Flight 77 crashed at the Pentagon, we have here
rather evidence of someone at the Pentagon falsifying evidence at the crime
- Not one passenger seat was seen by anyone
at the Pentagon, only a single pilot's seat.
- What about that piece of a Boeing 757 photographed by
Mark Faram on the lawn of the Pentagon?
- The one piece found on the lawn of the Pentagon that
was clearly recognizable as a piece of an American Airlines Boeing 757
is now shown to have been planted on the scene. See for yourself.
- The most famous piece of 757 debris is positively identified
by rivets and the lettering fragment and the expanse of blank aluminum
to the right of the letter fragement to have come from the starboard side
(the letter "n" is not followed by an expanse of aluminum with
two rows of rivets on the port side, because on the port side
a door is placed immediately to the right of the "n" -- but this
starboard-side piece of a 757 (confirmed by photos below) was found on
the lawn about 100 feet north of the crash -- and north would have been
portside of the plane (or missile) as it struck the Pentagon. Not only
that the piece is shaped so that it could not travel far through the air
-- like trying to throw an open newspaper page across the room -- and what
is more the wind, as all pictures of smoke movement that way attest, the
wind was form the northwest. Thus it is proven that this piece was planted.
Now look at the evidence assembled that proves all of the above.
- The famous piece of debris photographed on the lawn north
of the crash about ten minutes after the crash came from the starboard
side of a Boeing 757 all right, but the starboard side of the killer object
that hit the Pentagon faced south, not north. The piece was planted on
the wrong side of the crash.
- Photo taken from north of the crash hole. If
we were standing here during the "event" we would have seen the
port side of the killer object as it headed for the west wall. (Reminder: The
port side of an airplane is to the seated pilot's left.)
- But this piece did not come from the port side of any
plane. It is definitely a piece from a specific part of the starboard side
of a Boeing 757. But the starboard side of the killer object faced south.
This piece could not have gotten this distance north. It could not have
gotten through the a crashing plane and the explosion and it could not
have moved against the constant wind from the northwest that morning. The
shape, thinness and lightness of the aluminum could not have overcome air
resistance to travel this far in the wrong direction.
- Look carefully at this evidence:
- On the starboard side the letter "n"
is followed by bare aluminum for several more inches -- so that it is not
just the "n" from "American", rather it is the "n____"
- Two sides of Flight 77
- Now let's look at the actual jetliner in question. Below
are photos of AA Flight 77, Boeing 757-223 N644AA, Fleet #5BP, cn24602/365,
from which you can verify these crticial differences between the letter
"n" on the port side and the "n" on the starboard side
of that plane.
- "Flight 77 Album" on Airliners.net: http://tinyurl.com/nx4hwe
77 Starboard Side view link (above) again note letter
"n" in "American longer stretch of aluminum that follows
to the right of it before reaching the front emergency starboard-side emergency
- The piece is found and photographed more than a
hundred feet north of the crash -- on what would have been the port side,
not the starboard side, of the plane or missile that crashed. Yet the piece
is a starboard piece based on the stetch of bare aluminum following
the "n" and the rivets found only on the starboard side.
- Conclusion: By direct inspection of photos of the plane
the stretch of bare aluminum following the "n" of "American"
on the port side is not long enough to match the famous (starboard)
piece photographed north of the crash.
- The piece photographed did not come from the side of
a Boeing 757 that would have been facing this part of the lawn (north of
the crash) had the killer plane been Flight 77. The piece definitely comes
from the starboard side of a 575, the side that would have been facing
the lawn south of the crash, not north. This is easily and conclusively
- Concering the photographs of the "wrong-side
- The piece of American-airlines-style polished aluminum
skin with a fragment of the letter "n" on it and the stretch
of bare aluminum that was photographed by Mark Faram. Faram found the piece
lying near the heliport north of the crash, which was on the port side
of the actual killer jet as it approached the Pentagon's west wall.
- Below is an e-mail from Mark
Faram, who took this famous picture.
- Faram writes:
- > I saw the piece, that was near
- > the heliport pad and had to work around to
- > a shot if it
- Note also that he does not add that he took pictures
of any other piece. In other words, this piece "stuck out like a sore
thumb" amid the other "shards" and nondescript matter from
the crash and explosion. He says he arrived at the Annex 10 minutes after
the explosion -- but that would mean he came from the south - an how long
did it take him to see the piece? The man seems sincere to me
-- but his facts do not add up to proof that this starboard side piece
got 100 feet portside through an explosion and against the wind.
- From: "Mark Faram"
- To: "Dick Eastman"
- Cc: ; "Michel Chossudovsky"
- ; ; "Carol A.Valentine" ; ; "Lew
- Rockwell" ; "Jeff Rense" ; "Geoff
- Metcalf" ; "Alex Jones"
- Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:58 AM
- Subject: Pentagon Debris Pic: - it's the planted "photo
opportunity" , not the photography
- Dear Mr. Eastman,
- I hate to disappoint anyone, but here is the story behind
the photograph. At the time, I was a senior writer with Navy Times newspaper.
It is an independent weekly that is owned by the Gannett Corporation
(same owners as USA Today).
- I was at the Navy Annex, up the hill from the Pentagon
when I heard the explosion. I always keep a digital camera in my backpack
briefcase just as a matter of habit. When the explosion happened I
ran down the hill to the site and arrived there approximately 10 minutes
after the explosion. I saw the piece, that was near the heliport pad
and had to work around to get a shot if it with the building in the
background. Because the situation was still fluid, I was able to get in
close and make that image within fifteen minutes of the explosion
because security had yet to shut off the area. I photographed it twice,
with the newly arrived fire trucks pouring water into the building
in the background.
- The collapse of the building above area happened long
after I left the scene. I was not even aware that that had happened
until that evening when I watched the news. My photos were on the
wire by noon.
- That was the only piece of wreckage of any SIZE that
I saw, but was by no means the ONLY piece. Right after photographing
that piece of wreckage, I also photographed a triage area where medical
personnel were tending to a seriously burned man. A priest knelt in
the middle of the area and started to pray. I took that image and
- As I stepped onto the highway next to the triage area,
I knelt down to tie my shoe and all over the highway were small pieces
of aircraft skin, none bigger than a half-dollar. Anyone familiar
with aircraft has seen the greenish primer paint that covers many
interior metal surfaces - that is what these shards were covered with.
- I was out of the immediate area photographing other things
within 20 minutes of the crash.
- In short, I was there so quickly after the explosion
[10 minutes after] that there was not time for anyone to "plant"
this piece of wreckage and it would have been impossible for
anyone to plant the thousands of shards on the highway without
being noticed by myself or others.
- Mark D. Faram
- comment: Mr. Faram indicates that he arrived 10
minutes after the crash. I think that is plenty time for one of the
many FBI agents who were immediately on the scene picking up debris to
have also put down this particular piece. I also think that had the plane
been AA Flight 77 then some of the pieces would have been of the polished
aluminum of the outer skin as well as the greenish undercoating that is
sprayed on the inside of the skin. And certainly there is no reason for
there only to be small shards when an airliner crashes into an office building
-- the small shards are in fact the missile that was blown to smithereens
when fired from the attacking jet -- the explosion being shown in the second
picture of the series of five that have been released that were taken by
the security camera north of the attack. Mr. Faram is being honest and
sincere, but he simply had not put things together yet at the time of his
- Clearly the piece -- the only obvious AA 757 piece, was
planted, by mistake, on the lawn on the wrong side of the crash -- in order
to make the cover of Newsweek and dozens of other magazines around the
world. Once they saw that picture Americans were ready to heap ridicule
on anyone who pointed out the dozens of glaring discrepancies in the official
- Dick Eastman
- Yakima, Washington
- There is a famous photo that has from the first been
the great "proof" of the official story of the Pentagon crash.
It is a photo taken 10 minutes after the crash and it shows some of
the aluminum skin of a Boeing 757 with part of the letter "n"
from "American" painted on the side American Airlines 757s. Furthermore,
because there are several inches of blank aluminum following the letter
"n" and because of two rows of rivets in the piece we know that
the piece is from the starboard side and not the port side. On the port
side the letter "n" of "American" is immediately followed
by a door and there are no two rows of rivets. Photos of the Flight 77
Boeing exist showing that what is claimed here for all Boeing 757-200s is
indeed confirmed to have been true for this specific plane.
The fact that the photographed piece came from the starboard side is important
because the starboard side of the killer object (remote controlled jet
fighter or missile) as it approached and hit the Pentagon faced south,
but the fragment that was photographed was located more than a 100 feet
north of the crash and, as the photographs of the smoke confirm, the wind
was from the southwest that morning. Finally for the piece to have flown
that distance through the explosion and against the wind would have been
impossible give its shape and weight -- something like throwing an open
newspaper page across the room. The piece was planted.